About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
hill correspondent kelly o'donnell. you're watching it all from up there. what do we know? harry reid was on the floor today talking about it. we know that he needs five republicans to break, and there is a distinction between those who might be willing to vote for cloture to break the filibuster, but would still plan to vote against him when he would only at that point need just 50 to be confirmed, 51 to be confirmed. >> there is a lot of drama in this, andrea, and it gets complicated. it does come down to that. there are many more republicans that would beotology in the first step support ending the debate, taking the actual vote and then voting against hagel because everyone knows he already has publicly enough votes to be confirmed. we're in this period now where the drama is unfolding over a couple of key things. a group of republicans want information on two subjects. part of that coming from hagel related to past speeches, financial details, that they feel they did not get enough of during his confirmation process and the hearing where many people even his supporters say he did
. i don't think it does sound, but let's vote on it. to harry reid, the house, it has try to fix ceqa station. we have done nothing in the senate. -- to fix sequestration. we have done nothing in the senate. we are not doing anything in the senate. so, harry, please take the president's proposal or come up with one of your own. put it on the floor and let's start voting. if you do not like what we are doing, come up with your own. we have our fingerprint as republicans on this sequestration idea. it was the president's idea that we come as the republican party agreed to it. we got in this mess together and we will have to get out together. mr. president, helped lead us. -- help lead us. and on like anybody else on this stage, you are the commander in chief -- unlike anyone else on this stage. do you really want your legacy to be that you let the american congress into a deal that would destroy the military at the time it would need it the most? do you want to pivot to asia? how do you do that with 232 ships? when about iran acquiringhave you modernize the f-16 and the f-18? had you go
votes will be problems for harry reid and the senate? these are issues that are going to come over here at some point. don't you -- hold up the process if he's having trouble on these tough issues? >> the legislative process was designed to be inefficient and difficult. so that if congress were able to move a bill through both houses and could agree upon a bill, it would actually become a law. so at the start of every session there are always a number of issues that carry over from the prior session. and frankly there's a lot of scar tissue that carries over with a lot of these bills. it's up to congress to figure out where the common ground is and how to deal with it. let me make clear i don't like the sequester. i think it's taking a meat ax to our government. meat ax to many programs and will weaken our national defense. that's why i fought to not have the sequester in the first place. but the president didn't want to have to deal with the debt limit again before his re-election. it was the president and senate democrats who committed to working with us to get an outcome out of the s
's the interesting thing. if you look today we have barack obama, democrat president of the united states. and harry reid the majority leader. and the democrats are in control of both. if you think back at what happened back in during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states, and the democrats were the minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had both come up. john bolton same thing. subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- we remember dirk, there a lot of people that it not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here the democrats didn't like him. they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. it's not a filibuster today. people are trying to blame me the bad guy causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. it anymore the case than the 2005, 2006, and other times when we had a nominee put forth by president wush who was objected to by the democrat. dirk when he was nominated to be the secretary of entire job, there was a lot of opposition to the
? >> yes. >> yes. thank you, senator. as i understand it on october 2, 2008, majority leader harry reid brought a similar bill to the floor. in fact, it was called the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability act of 2008. and he brought it to the floor in october 2, 2008. there have been media reports that you blocked unanimous consent for the consideration of that bill. are those reports true or not? >> i was one of some republican senators that did not want that vote to go forward. i voted against it in subcommittee. and the reason i did was because the bush administration did not want that bill to go forward. the reason they didn't was because they were involved in negotiations with the russians and the u.n. and security council members to put multilateral sanctions through. >> but just to be clear you did block unanimous contestant. >> i was -- con sent in >> i was part of those who did. >> would it surprise you that an earlier version of those sanctions bill was actually co- sponsored bicek taxpayer cary and clinton and obama at the time? would that surprise you? >> no. not nece
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)